Cormac practises predominantly in employment and discrimination law (including non-employment discrimination). He represents parties in multi-day trials and has a busy advisory practice. 

Cases include:                                                                         

• Represented  the claimant in a strategically important worker status claim in respect of 25 years’ unpaid holiday pay, which raised an issue about whether the definition of “employee” under regulation 2(1) TUPE includes workers. The Respondent instructed a leading silk and a favourable settlement was achieved on the first day of the hearing.
   
• Harrison v Heritage Venues Ltd 330161/2023 – Represented the claimant in a two-day trial in relation to her selection for redundancy after returning from maternity leave. Claims of unfair dismissal, indirect sex discrimination and part-time working detriment upheld. 
   
• Advising a member of a political party with anti-Zionist beliefs on the merits of a civil claim for philosophical belief discrimination.
   
• Advising a local councillor who was subject to disciplinary proceedings by a political party on the merits of a civil claim for race discrimination. 
   
• As junior counsel, acting in a case concerning whether restaurant tips distributed through a “tronc” scheme form part of an employee’s average weekly remuneration for the purposes of calculating holiday pay entitlement, currently on appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (led by Paras Gorasia). 
   
• Kelly v London Underground Limited 2207830/2022 – Represented a claimant with degenerative hearing loss in a five-day trial concerning the respondent’s failure to provide a hearing aid. Claims of failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment related to disability upheld. The tribunal took the unusual step of awarding aggravated damages, on the basis that the respondent’s refusal to concede that the claimant was disabled until a late stage in the proceedings was oppressive. 
   
• Advising a graduate student employed by an Oxbridge College on claims arising from allegations of sexual assault. 
   
• Represented senior academics in a KC-led independent grievance investigation into allegations of trade union victimisation.
   
• Represented a claimant engaged in a safeguarding role at sex parties organised by the Respondent company in a two-day preliminary hearing, successfully establishing worker status under ERA 1996 and employee status under EA 2010. 
   
• Advising on a range of contractual issues, including penalty clauses and clawback clauses relating to training and bonuses. 
   
• As junior counsel, defending a career-long financial loss discrimination claim, currently on appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (led by Paras Gorasia). 
   
• Evans and others v Solace Womens’ Aid 2200468/2022: Represented four counsellors engaged by a domestic violence charity in a two-day preliminary hearing, successfully establishing worker status. Claim settled in respect of taken but unpaid annual leave. 

Cormac has a particular interest in the law relating to trade unions, including industrial action and collective bargaining. 

Cases include:

• Advising a trade union on a group claim under section 145B TULRCA in relation to the Respondent’s unilateral imposition of a pay rise outside the collective bargaining procedure. 
   
• Advising a trade union on the implications of the Supreme Court judgment in Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Mercer.
   
• Advising a trade union on the lawfulness of nationwide industrial action in the public sector. 
   
• As a trade union legal officer, represented the union in hearings before the Central Arbitration Committee across a range of issues, including the appropriateness of proposed bargaining units, allegations of unfair practices in relation to balloting, and specifying the method of collective bargaining.

Cormac represents tenants and homeless people in private and public law disputes, including:

• Defending possession proceedings, including public law, Equality Act and human rights defences.
• Anti-social behaviour injunctions and committal proceedings.
• Judicial review of homelessness decisions.
• Homelessness appeals under section 204 of the Housing Act 1996.
• Claims for damages and injunctive relief relating to disrepair.
• Prosecution of landlords under section 82 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.  

Cases include:

• Representing student protestors from the University of Bristol Palestine Encampment in possession proceedings brought by the University against Persons Unknown, as reported by The Guardian. 
   
• Judicial review challenging a council’s refusal to approve a management transfer for a secure tenant whose child was at risk of gang violence (ongoing).
   
• Judicial review challenging a council’s refusal to provide interim accommodation pending review under section 188(3) HA 1996, on the basis that the council had failed to consider whether the claimant had priority need due to his status as a care leaver who had served a custodial sentence. Claim settled following grant of permission. 
   
• Sullivan v Isle of Wight Council (2024) September Legal Action 57: successful appeal under section 204 HA 1996 against a decision of intentional homelessness, on the basis that the council had failed to consider whether the applicant’s mental health conditions and gambling addiction meant that her accrual of rent arrears was not a deliberate act within the meaning of section 191(1) HA 1996. 
   
• Harding v Bell (2023) November Legal Action 37: Successful defence of possession claim brought under section 21 HA 1988, on the basis that a landlord is unable to rely on the deemed service provision in CPR 6.26 in relation to a section 21 notice.